Ask HN: Could we use Shellshock to patch vulnerable systems?
7 comments
It would be treated the same as exploiting a system for any other reason.
Friendly worms have been done before (welchia). The problems with friendly worms are numerous. It is more than just a legal issue. A malicious worm is looking to propagate quietly and perhaps leave some sort of backdoor control channel. A friendly worm has to propagate (faster than malicious worms), and patch (without DDoSing patching infrastructure), and self terminate (which harms it's ability to propagate). It's hard to imagine a real world scenario where a friendly worm would be effective. It would either take too long to develop, or it would do just as much damage as a regular worm.
Friendly worms have been done before (welchia). The problems with friendly worms are numerous. It is more than just a legal issue. A malicious worm is looking to propagate quietly and perhaps leave some sort of backdoor control channel. A friendly worm has to propagate (faster than malicious worms), and patch (without DDoSing patching infrastructure), and self terminate (which harms it's ability to propagate). It's hard to imagine a real world scenario where a friendly worm would be effective. It would either take too long to develop, or it would do just as much damage as a regular worm.
Thanks, I did not know about that kind of worms or about the Welchia worm.
In France, you deserve 3 years in jail and a fine of 45000€ for this.
http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichCodeArticle.do?idArticle...
http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichCodeArticle.do?idArticle...
Since this is a RCE bug, sure, you can fix it. But its not your place to fix a vulnerability. It's on the vendor to provide the patch.
I will point out like its been pointed out in another comment this probably breaks the law somewhere.
I will point out like its been pointed out in another comment this probably breaks the law somewhere.
>Are there legal issues about fixing a vulnerability in a system that doesn't belongs to you?
Yes. Because it doesn't belong to you. Therefore you have no right to 'fix' it.
Yes. Because it doesn't belong to you. Therefore you have no right to 'fix' it.
I'm pretty sure in many places this would be illegal
Definitely in the UK
Definitely in the UK
It's a good idea, but I would expext most applications vulnerable to not run as root. You would need to be root to patch the bash executable.
Good point. So I guess one would have to combine that with another vulnerability to be able to get root privileges.
We could also imagine a worm contacting the owner of the server and asking her to fix it.
We could also imagine a worm contacting the owner of the server and asking her to fix it.
[deleted]
If you attempted to do this, you would likely end up in jail for a very long time under the CFAA. Fair warning.
[edit] Ok, I guess the part about the legal issues was a bit candid. What I am really saying is wouldn't it be a good thing to have a worm closing vulnerabilities, compared to the thousands of hackers exploiting this vulnerability to steal or spy?